Jeff Hale, et al v. Emerson Electric Company
| Jeff Hale, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Raymond Gray, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Andrew Bowers, Emilio Gonzales, Kenneth Thompson, on behalf of themselves and all other similarly situated, Eric Shults, Justin Swires, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Estaban Maravilla, individually and on behalf of all others, Lauren Checki, Chad Venhaus, Kevin Brees, Chris Willis and Fred Wilmer |
| Emerson Electric Company |
| Sears Holdings Corporation, Sears, Roebuck and Company and The Home Depot, Inc. |
| 22-8005 |
| March 22, 2022 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on March 21, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Miscellaneous case docketed. [5139266] [22-8005] (CMH) [Entered: 03/22/2022 02:23 PM] |
| PETITION for permission to appeal under FRCvP 23(f) (Electronic) filed by Petitioners Andrew Bowers, Kevin Brees, Lauren Checki, Mr. Emilio Gonzales, Raymond Gray, Jeff Hale, Estaban Maravilla, Eric Shults, Justin Swires, Kenneth Thompson, Chad Venhaus, Chris Willis and Fred Wilmer w/service 03/22/2022. [5139273] [22-8005] (CMH) [Entered: 03/22/2022 02:31 PM] |
| MOTION for permission to file petition for permission under seal, filed by Petitioners Andrew Bowers, Kevin Brees, Lauren Checki, Mr. Emilio Gonzales, Raymond Gray, Jeff Hale, Estaban Maravilla, Eric Shults, Justin Swires, Kenneth Thompson, Chad Venhaus, Chris Willis and Fred Wilmer w/service 03/22/2022. [5139293] [22-8005] (CMH) [Entered: 03/22/2022 02:48 PM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.